I see that KatyBr suggested this word before, but it was back in 2005, and I couldn't find that there was an article on it since, so I thought I'd throw it back on the pile.

I would love to see it!

Sardith

“The difference between the right word and the almost right word is the difference between lightning and a lightning bug.” ~Mark Twain, [pen name for Samuel Clemens], American author and humorist, (1835-1910)~

Would the supporter of one Presidential candidate, who publicly referred to another Presidential candidate's religion as a 'cult', be considered an iconoclast?

If so, I believe a Dr. Goodwordiconoclast article would be quite timely.

Sardith

“The difference between the right word and the almost right word is the difference between lightning and a lightning bug.” ~Mark Twain, [pen name for Samuel Clemens], American author and humorist, (1835-1910)~

sardith wrote:Would the supporter of one Presidential candidate, who publicly referred to another Presidential candidate's religion as a 'cult', be considered an iconoclast?

My take is no. To be a breaker of icons, the icons need to be generally accepted. A Mormon who speaks against basic Mormon teachings would be an iconoclast, as would a Catholic who goes against the Pope's rule. If one doesn't accept the "word" of a religion, they are not necessarily an iconoclast, just a non-believer. I believe you have to have been part of something, or that the something is so endemic to your society that being against it is seen as wrong, to become an iconoclast.

I may be wrong, so pile on folks and let us know what you think it takes to be an iconoclast.

Life is like playing chess with chessmen who each have thoughts and feelings and motives of their own.

I am interested in the distinction between iconoclast and heretic. To me, the former takes an active role to dismantle the foundations of a religion, whereas the latter would rather passively leave the fold. That is, until they are hunted down and slaughtered by the Orthodox, true believers.